building a strong foundation for school success: kentucky ... · foundation for school success:...

June 2013

Building a Strong Foundation for School

Success: Kentucky’s Early Childhood

Continuous Assessment Guide

August 2006

September 2010

June 2013

This is the second document in the series

Building a Strong Foundation for School Success

Kentucky’s Early Childhood Standards (Summer, 2003)

Kentucky’s Early Childhood Continuous Assessment Guide (Summer, 2004)

Kentucky’s Early Childhood Quality Self-Study (Fall, 2004)

Developed and printed with support from: Kentucky Department of Education, Division of Early

Childhood Development and the Cabinet for Health and Family Services, Division of Child Care

Please cite as: Rous, B. & Townley, K. (Eds.). (2006,2013). Building a strong foundation for school success:

Kentucky's early childhood continuous assessment guide. Frankfort, KY: Kentucky Department

of Education.

Submitted to the Kentucky Department of Education

By the Early Childhood Assessment Work Group

Beth Rous and Kim Townley, Editors

June 2013

Assessment Work Group Members

This Guide was developed with support and input from the following Early Childhood

Assessment Work Group members. Their time and expertise are greatly appreciated.

Division of Early Childhood Development

Special thanks and recognition to Jessica Mitchell for her tireless work and patience as the work

group constructed this important document.

Annette Bridges Kentucky Department of Education

Marinell Brown Gateway Community and Technical College

Mike Cheek Kentucky Cabinet of Health and Family Services

Dr. Carole Gnatuk University of Kentucky, Cooperative Extension

Dr. Jennifer Grisham-Brown University of Kentucky

Camille Haggard Big Blue Bird Early Childhood Center

Phyllis Hall Anderson County Regional Training Center

Mary Howard Kentucky Department of Education

Dr. Nancy Lovett Calloway County Regional Training Center

Dr. Katherine McCormick University of Kentucky

Joe McCowan Kentucky Department of Education

Teri Mehler Kentucky Child Care Network

Melissa Monts Anderson County Early Childhood Center

Nancy Newberry Kentucky Department of Education

Fanetta Puckett Ballard County Schools

Carol Schroeder UK Interdisciplinary Human Development Institute

Dr. Barbara Singleton Kentucky Department of Education

Dr. Vicki Stayton Western Kentucky University

Marti Stuckey Henderson County Schools

Anne Swinford First Steps

Scott Tomchek University of Louisville

Joann Travis Bluegrass Head Start

Earl Trevor Head Start Collaboration Office

Taylor Tucker WKU Child Care Resource and Referral

Co-Chairs

Dr. Beth Rous University of Kentucky

Interdisciplinary Human Development Institute

Dr. Kim Townley Kentucky Department of Education

June 2013

In 2012-2013, this document was updated by the Assessment Work Group of the Early

Childhood Advisory Council, chaired by Felicia Smith, Kentucky Department of Education, and

Dr. Amy Hood, Western Kentucky University. Special thanks to the following work group

members:

Carla Brown Simpson County Regional Training Center

Bill Buchanan Kentucky Department of Education

Carol Elder Murray Head Start

Jaesook Gilbert Northern Kentucky University

Paula Goff First Steps, Cabinet for Health and Family Services

Jennifer Grisham-Brown University of Kentucky

Mary Howard UK Human Development Institute

Sharon Hundley Campbellsville University

Nancy Lovett Calloway Regional Training Center

Sherri Meyer Child Care Aware of Barren River

Joe Roberts Head Start Collaboration Office

Debbie Schumacher Campbellsville University

Barbara Singleton Calloway Regional Training Center

Whitney Stevenson Early Childhood, Fayette County Public Schools

Kathy Stoval Early Childhood, Jefferson County Schools

Terry Tolan Governor’s Office of Early Childhood

June 2013 Introduction 1

Introduction

In 2000, the Kentucky General Assembly passed legislation establishing the KIDS NOW

early childhood initiative. The KIDS NOW early childhood initiative has numerous program

components designed to help Kentucky realize the following vision.

All young children are healthy and safe, possess the foundation that will

enable school and personal success, and live in strong families that are

supported and strengthened within their communities.

The programs initiated through KIDS NOW have been designed to address four major areas:

assuring maternal and child health, supporting families, enhancing early care and education, and

establishing a support structure. To assist with the process of measuring outcomes associated

with the KIDS NOW early childhood initiative, Four Key Dimensions for Success were

identified and processes for measuring success in these dimensions were developed. The Four

Key Dimensions include state level indicators of success, environmental standards, personnel

competencies, and child standards.

State Level Outcomes and Indicators are designed to measure the overall success of the state

in meeting the needs of young children and their families. The state indicators include three

broad outcomes: a) children possess the foundation to succeed in school; b) schools ensure

children’s continuous progress; and c) families and communities support lifelong learning. Each

outcome includes specific indicators that are measured on an annual basis. For information

about the state indicators, contact the Division of Early Childhood Development at 502-5648341.

Environmental standards are designed to raise the quality of programs that provide care and

education for young children and support positive outcomes for children and families. These

standards are included in the STARS for KIDS NOW Quality Rating System. Standards

encompass five major areas: ratios, curriculum, training, regulatory compliance, and personnel.

Information about the STARS for KIDS NOW Quality Rating System can be obtained at

http://www.kidsnow.ky.gov.

Personnel Competencies focus on the specific knowledge, skills and competencies needed by

early childhood professionals to work effectively with young children and families. These

competencies are described in the Early Childhood Core Content. The Core Content includes

seven subject areas across five levels of professional growth. Information about the Kentucky

http://www.kidsnow.ky.gov/


Early Childhood Core Content can be obtained at http://www.kidsnow.ky.gov.

Child Standards focus on what children should know and be able to do. Building a Strong

Foundation for School Success: Kentucky’s Early Childhood Standards is designed as a

framework to assist families, early care and education professionals, administrators, and others in

understanding what children are able to know and do from birth thorough four years of age. Two

additional pieces of the Building a Strong Foundation for School Success series include

Kentucky’s Early Childhood Continuous Assessment Guide and the Kentucky’s Early Childhood

Quality Self-Study. The Building a Strong Foundation for School Success series was developed

for all children from birth to age five who participate in early care and education programs

within the state. To assist families in understanding the Early Childhood Standards, a family

version is also available that describes what the standards mean and how they can support their

child’s growth and development at home. The reader may access copies of Kentucky’s Early

Childhood Standards at http://kidsnow.ky.gov/Pages/default.aspx.

Kentucky’s Early Childhood Standards

The first component of Building a Strong Foundation for School Success is the child

standards. These standards were designed to reflect the range of developmental abilities of

young children at different ages and to represent the expectations for the skills and levels of

knowledge that children are able to achieve. The document is not a comprehensive list of every

skill or piece of knowledge that a particular child may exhibit. Rather, the standards include

the critical knowledge and essential skills learned in the early years. The content for learning

established through the standards is intended to support families and early care and education

professionals in planning experiences to promote either a particular child’s, or a group of

children’s progress towards achieving the next level of development.

Kentucky’s Early Childhood Standards may be used as a framework in the following ways:

to assist in planning experiences that will promote children’s progress towards achieving benchmarks,

to ensure that the activities, materials, and experiences provided for children address all aspects of the developmental continuum, and

to ensure that assessment processes address all standards and benchmarks.

Kentucky’s Early Childhood Standards are not intended to serve as a curriculum guide or as

http://www.kidsnow.ky.gov/http://kidsnow.ky.gov/Pages/default.aspx


an assessment tool of children’s performance. An early childhood curriculum generally is based

on a philosophy of how children learn; thus, it contains both content (i.e., what the children

should learn) and method (i.e., how to teach the content; e.g., Montessori or High/Scope).

Assessment involves gathering information from a variety of sources in order to plan a program

for an individual child or for a group of children, and requires the use of both formal and

informal assessment methods. Kentucky’s Early Childhood Standards are not designed to

accomplish either of these ends. The document is not a detailed listing all skills and knowledge

that children exhibit in their developmental progress; neither does it propose a method for

teaching children particular knowledge or skills.

Kentucky’s Early Childhood Quality Self Study

The Kentucky Department of Education, Division of Early Childhood Development

convened a Work Group to address the need to determine the level of quality of early care and

education center-based programs through a self-study document. The document, Building a

Foundation for School Success: Kentucky’s Early Childhood Quality Self Study, available at

(need to add the website address here) initially emerged from the desire to update two existing

self study approaches—the Kentucky Preschool Self-Study (1994) and the STARS for KIDS

NOW, Quality Rating System (2001). The process has provided an opportunity to develop a

single tool that is research based, is appropriate across settings regardless of the philosophy and

approach used, and can provide direction for program improvement.

The self study tool was developed by a Work Group representing the early childhood

community in Kentucky including state-funded preschool, Head Start, Early Head Start, child

care, licensing and regulation, Child Care Aware, quality rating system technical assistants, and

higher education programs. This document focuses on five key areas important to early

childhood programming, while embedding within these areas the concepts of transition,

diversity, guidance, and training. The five areas are:

Program Structure and Personnel

Child Experiences within Curriculum and Assessment

Child Experiences in the Environment

Program Interactions with Families and Communities

Health, Nutrition and Safety

The Self Study allows the professional to rate the status of the program on specific standards


and indicators as not met, in progress, or met. Examples of evidence of the indicator (what it

looks like) are also provided. Space is available to delineate an action plan for progressing on

each indicator to “met” status. With the updated version of the Continuous Assessment Guide,

the Professional Development and Program Evaluation sections have been removed and are

being incorporated into the Quality Self Study. This was done to ensure quality programmatic

information was maintained in one document.

Kentucky’s Early Childhood Continuous Assessment Guide

The remainder of this document is designed to provide specific information about the

Building a Strong Foundation for School Success series: Kentucky’s Early Childhood

Continuous Assessment Guide. A Continuous Assessment System, as defined by the Kentucky

Department of Education (March, 2004) has the following features:

Includes both formal and informal assessments that are conducted on a regular basis.

Is integrated with instruction at various times.

Improves learning and helps guide and direct the teaching-learning process.

Should inform every aspect of instruction and curriculum.

The selection of procedures and tools for assessment and methods for planning and providing

activities and experiences is often left to the discretion of families and early care and education

professionals, since there is a multitude of ways in which these can be accomplished. To

support this process, the Assessment Guide provides specific information on recommendations

for early care and education professionals on how to link child standards and assessment.

Purpose and Use of This Document

All three components of The Building a Strong Foundation for School Success series have

been carefully designed so that the materials can be used by all early care and education

professionals working with young children from birth to 5 years of age, both in home and center-

based settings. The Early Childhood Standards help ensure quality early care and education

services by providing a common language through which program staff can express expectations

for young children. The Early Childhood Quality Self- Study helps programs evaluate their

services and determine areas of strength and those areas that need to be addressed to better help

children meet the early childhood standards. Similarly, the Early Childhood Continuous


Assessment Guide provides recommended guidelines and practices in all areas of assessment:

screening, diagnostic and instructional. In addition, both the standards and assessment guide will

provide valuable information to help early care and education programs be accountable for, and

document both the results and benefits of their programs.

Kentucky has chosen to use a unique approach in the development of the state’s early

childhood assessment guide. There are several distinctive features of this system.

Assessment Work Group Charge and Focus

While Kentucky’s Early Childhood Standards are not designed to be used as an assessment

tool, the need for assessing children’s ongoing development and their ability to meet the

standards is an important component of the early care and education system within Kentucky.

Therefore, an individually and developmentally appropriate approach to continuous assessment

across the diverse programs serving young children and families in the state was needed.

To this end, a statewide Work Group representing the diverse early childhood field was

established and charged with developing recommendations to be used statewide by programs

serving young children and their families in order to help them:

develop a continuous assessment process,

measure child progress and improvement related to Kentucky’s Early Childhood Standards,

address children’s need for additional assessment and diagnosis of specific developmental delays, disabilities, or special needs, and

measure effectiveness of programs in serving young children and their families.


To facilitate the work of the group, the following principles were used:

1) The recommendations from The National Education Goals Panel (1998) to

include only assessments that:

Bring about benefits

Are tailored to a specific purpose

Are reliable, valid and fair for a particular age

Are age-appropriate in content and method

Are linguistically appropriate

Use families as a valued source of and audience for assessment information

2) The recommendation from the National Association for the Education of Young

Children (NAEYC) & the National Association of Early Childhood Specialists in

State Departments of Education (NAECS/SDE) (2003):

Make ethical, appropriate, valid, and reliable assessment a central part of all early childhood

programs. To assess young children's strengths, progress, and needs, use assessment methods

that are developmentally appropriate, culturally and linguistically responsive, tied to children's

daily activities, supported by professional development, inclusive of families, and connected to

specific, beneficial purposes: (1) making sound decisions about teaching and learning, (2)

identifying significant concerns that may require focused intervention for individual children,

and (3) helping programs improve their educational and developmental interventions.

3) The recommendations provided by the Division for Early Childhood of the

Council for Exceptional Children (DEC, 2001) for children who have been

identified as having a disability or special needs, including key features

related to inclusion of families as partners in the assessment process and

ensuring that assessment instruments meet high standards. Standards for

assessments include:

utility across multiple and interrelated purposes,

acceptability by both professionals and family members,

authenticity of tasks (i.e., real behavior in real contexts),

collaboration in conducting assessments across team members,

convergence of information that is functional, valid and reliable,

ability to accommodate individual differences,

sensitivity to small increments of change, and

congruence of validation processes with children for whom the assessment will be used.

Updates

This current printing (2012-2013) includes alignment made to the revised and updated

Kentucky Early Childhood Standards. This document now references new research, state and

federal requirement language, and updated assessments (i.e., references to the most current


version). In addition, the “Professional Development” and “Program Evaluation” sections are no

longer available here, but are being moved to the Quality Self Study document scheduled for

revision later this year (2013). These changes were reviewed and approved by the Early

Childhood Advisory Council (ECAC).

Approach Used to Develop Assessment Recommendations

In order to accomplish the charge set forth, the Work Group met from December 2003

through April 2004. The Work Group began the development process by a) conducting a review

of the current child standards, b) reviewing the literature for recommended practices in

assessment, and c) determining key desired features that would need to be included in a

continuous assessment process. The next step was the determination of criteria for appropriate

assessment tools, including critical aspects related to technical adequacy (e.g., reliability,

validity).

Once components of the assessment guide were determined and criteria for review

established, the group gathered information about assessment tools currently available and

those that were in use across the state. All assessment tools identified were then evaluated

based on the established criteria. A total of 79 instruments were reviewed.

Once instruments had been reviewed, the Work Group determined the most appropriate

category for each assessment tool: screening, diagnostic, instructional. For those tools

categorized as instructional, the publishers and/or Work Group members aligned or

crosswalked items included on the assessment with the Kentucky Early Childhood Standards.

These crosswalks then were reviewed by additional Work Group members to ensure that items

were matched reliably.

The final task for the Work Group was to determine key information to be included in the

assessment document. Once the format and content were determined, specific recommendations

related to training, technical support and dissemination were identified.

Overview of Document/Layout

Building a Strong Foundation for School Success: Kentucky’s Early Childhood Continuous

Assessment Guide is organized into several sections. Following this Introduction, the next


section provides an Overview of assessment and critical components of a continuous

assessment system. Specific information is provided about the use of assessments as part of a

general program design. Guiding principles for the assessment process are also outlined and

discussed.

The next three sections outline specific types of child assessment useful for three specific

purposes: Screening (developmental, universal and school readiness), Diagnostic, and

Instructional. Within each of these sections, the definition and purpose of the specific type of

assessment is described, followed by recommended practices for conducting that level of

assessment. Additional resources are provided. The Recommended Assessments section

includes a) information on how to link assessment with program goals, and b) crosswalks that

provide information on the relationship of the standards and assessment tools in the

curriculum/instructional section that have been

recommended for use in Kentucky.

Finally, an Appendix provides additional resources that may be helpful in designing an

assessment system. Also included is a glossary of terms that are used throughout this guide.

Additional Resources

Bracken, B.,Crawford C. (2010). Basic concepts in early childhood education standards: A 50

state review. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37, 421-430.

Marion, M. & Mindes, G., consulting eds. (2004, January). Links to online resources in

assessment. Beyond the Journal Young Children on the Web. Retrieved February 24, 2004,

from http://www.naeyc.org/resources/journal/2004/btj01/OnlineResources.pdf

Marion, M. & Mindes, G., consulting eds. (2004, January). Resources on assessment. Beyond

the Journal Young Children on the Web. Retrieved February 24, 2004, from

http://www.naeyc.org/resources/journal/2004/BTJ01/resources.asp

Martella, J. (2004, January). The words we use: A glossary of terms for early childhood

education standards and assessments. Beyond the Journal Young Children on the Web.

Retrieved February 24, 2004, from

http://www.naeyc.org/resources/journal/2004/btj01/martella.asp

Maxwell, K.L. & Clifford, R.M. (2004, January). School readiness assessment. Beyond the

http://www.naeyc.org/resources/journal/2004/btj01/OnlineResources.pdfhttp://www.naeyc.org/resources/journal/2004/BTJ01/resources.asphttp://www.naeyc.org/resources/journal/2004/btj01/martella.asp


Journal Young Children on the Web. Retrieved February 24, 2004, from

http://www.naeyc.org/resources/journal/2004/btj01/Maxwell.pdf

Shillady, A.L. (2004, January). Choosing an appropriate assessment system. Beyond the Journal

Young Children on the Web. Retrieved February 24, 2004, from

http://www.naeyc.org/resources/journal/2004/btj01/shillady.ASP

http://www.naeyc.org/resources/journal/2004/btj01/Maxwell.pdfhttp://www.naeyc.org/resources/journal/2004/btj01/shillady.ASP

June 2013 Overview 1

Overview of Assessment

Assessment of young children is complex, having many components, and various purposes.

The National Education Goals Panel (Shepard, Kagan, & Wurtz, 1998) identifies four purposes

for assessment.

Purpose #1: Assessing to promote child learning and development.

Purpose #2: Assessing to identify children for health and special services.

Purpose #3: Assessing to monitor trends and evaluate programs and services.

Purpose #4: Assessing developmental progress to hold individual children, teachers, and

schools accountable.

Each of these purposes, as well as their applicability to Kentucky’s approach to developing an

early childhood assessment system, will be discussed in this section. In this discussion of the

assessment purposes and the types of assessment that your program should consider, a number of

terms will be used. A glossary of terms is provided in the Appendix. Terms that might be

unfamiliar to you are included in the glossary and are underlined in the text. However, there are

also a set of key terms that are necessary to understand prior to continuing with this document.

These terms are central to the development of a Continuous Assessment System and are defined

here. It is important to note that some of these terms are defined differently for different

populations. The definitions provided here present how these terms are interpreted and used

throughout this document.


Continuous Assessment System – An assessment process that 1) includes both formal and

informal assessments that are conducted on a regular basis, 2) is integrated with instruction at

various times, 3) improves learning and helps guide and direct the teaching-learning process, 4)

informs every aspect of instruction and curriculum (Kentucky Department of Education, March,

2004).

Informal Assessment (Nonformal) - A procedure for obtaining information that can be used to

make judgments about characteristics of children or programs using means other than

standardized instruments (CCSSO, 2004). Information is collected on an ongoing basis at

different times and across multiple environments, using a broad variety of quantitative and

qualitative methods (Losardo & Syverson, 2011).

Formal Assessments – A procedure for obtaining information that can be used to make

judgments about characteristics of children or programs using standardized instruments (CCSSO,

2004). Formal assessments yield information on a preset content and have specific guidelines for

administration (Losardo & Syverson, 2011).

Standardized assessment – a specific set of standardized tasks presented to a child to determine

how well a child performs on the tasks presented. Standardization includes 4 components:

standard materials, administrative procedures, scoring procedures, and score interpretation

(Bailey, 2004).

Norm-referenced assessment - Provides information on how a child is developing in relation to a

larger group of children of the same chronological age. Items are chosen based on statistical

criteria, such as percentage of children who master a particular skill at a certain age or whether

the item correlates well with the total test (Losardo & Syverson, 2011).

Criterion-referenced assessment - measures the mastery of specific objectives defined by

predetermined standards of criteria. Items are usually sequentially arranged within the

developmental domains or subject areas. Numerical scores represent proportion of specific

domain or subject area that a child has mastered (Losardo & Syverson, 2011).

Curriculum-based assessment - curricular activities are provided for each assessment item. Used

as direct means for identifying a child’s entry point within an educational program and for

refining and readjusting instruction. Assessment and curricular content are coordinated to

address same skills and abilities. Repeated testing occurs over time to measure child’s progress

on these skills (Losardo & Syverson, 2011).

Technical adequacy – information provided on the assessment tool related to reliability, validity

and procedures used to ensure that the assessment is well constructed.

Valid - the extent to which the assessment tool measures what it says it measures.

Reliable - the extent to which the assessment will provide consistent information repeatedly.

The assessment will provide the same information if you were to repeat the assessment on the

same child.


Assessing to Promote Child Learning and Development

Professionals agree that the most important reason for assessing young children is to help

them to learn. The primary purpose of this document is to provide a guide for early

childhood programs as they develop and conduct a continuous assessment system that

focuses on improving instruction for children, thus supporting their learning and aligning

their learning with Kentucky’s Early Childhood Standards.

Information gained from this type of assessment is used to make instructional decisions about

individual children. Examples of this type of assessment are direct observations of children in

authentic tasks and activities, samples of children’s work, and interviews with caregivers and

families.

Early childhood programs in the state must design continuous assessment systems that

support their specific program goals and objectives, reflect Kentucky’s Early Childhood

Standards, and align with the K-12 Program of Studies. Additional information about

assessment to promote child learning and development is included in the Instructional

section of this document.

Identifying Children for Health and Special Services

Research evidence is clear that the earlier children with special needs are identified and

intervention strategies are implemented, the more progress young children will make toward

their learning trajectory. Information from a combination of informal, norm-referenced, and

criterion-referenced assessments are used in the procedures to determine eligibility for First

Steps, Kentucky’s Early Intervention System, as well as to determine the eligibility of three-

and four-year-olds for special education services in state-funded preschool programs.

Information gathered through this assessment process is used to determine the specialized

instructional services necessary for children with special needs in First Steps, state-funded

preschool, or other programs.

Early childhood programs use screening instruments for all children to identify areas of

concern, with follow-up referral to related professionals for more in-depth assessment and

program planning. Additional information about assessments conducted to identify children with

special health and educational needs are included in the Screening and Diagnostic sections of this

document.


Assessing to Monitor Trends and Evaluate Programs and Services

This assessment information is gathered for groups of children and is used to make decisions

about educational and social programs. Legislators will use this type of assessment information

to help decide if the investment they have made in a program is yielding the results that they

desire. For example, the Kentucky Education Reform Act (KERA) Preschool evaluation

determined that the state funded preschool program helped participating children to make

significant gains in their educational attainment (Kentucky Department of Education Preschool

Program Report, 1997-98). Assessment information about Kentucky’s HANDS voluntary home

visitation program documents that the program results in more babies being born full-term, fewer

babies being born with low birth weights, and participating families engaging in child abuse

significantly less than families who were eligible but did not participate (Illback, 2004). The

KIDS NOW third party evaluation has demonstrated that early childhood programs that are

participating in more component parts of the KIDS NOW Early Childhood Initiative have higher

quality programs (KIDS NOW, 2003).

These assessment results indicate to policy makers that their dollar investment is working to

meet established goals. The results of this type of assessment are not directly seen by families

and programs; however they can result in either reduced or increased funding for programs.

The Program Evaluation section of this document addresses meaningful ways to evaluate

your program for improvement, but assessment to monitor trends and evaluate programs and

services is beyond the scope of this document. If you would like additional information about

this type of assessment consult the resources included at the end of this section.

Assessing Progress to Hold Children, Teachers, and Schools Accountable

This type of assessment is also known as “high stakes” accountability testing. This type of

assessment is usually mandated by an external agency such as the federal government and can

result in continued funding or de-funding of particular programs. The federal legislation No

Child Left Behind is an example of a federal requirement for this kind of assessment. However,

experts agree that this “high stakes” accountability testing is not appropriate until the end of

third grade or preferably fourth grade (Shepard, Kagan, & Wurtz, (1998). It is well accepted

that before age eight, standardized achievement measures are not sufficiently accurate to be used

for high stakes decision making (McCormick & Nellis, 2004, Shepard, Kagan, & Wurtz, 1998).


A thorough discussion of the use of these standardized achievement measures for this purpose is

beyond the scope of this document. Additional information can be obtained from the resources

provided at the end of this section.

In developing a continuous assessment system for a program, there are a number of

recommended practices that need to be considered. Specific practices for each of the types of

assessments and purposes discussed in this guide are provided within the appropriate section.

However, the following guiding principles and values proposed by The National Association for

the Education of Young Children (NAEYC, 2003) are appropriate for each purpose and can

assure a truly integrated, effective system of early childhood curriculum, assessment, and

program evaluation:

Belief in civic and democratic values

Commitment to ethical behavior on behalf of children

Use of important goals as guides to action

Coordinated systems

Support for children as individuals and as members of families, cultures, and communities

Respect for children’s abilities and differences

Partnerships with families

Respect for evidence

Shared accountability

These Guiding Principles and Values are described in more detail in the document, “Early

Childhood Curriculum, Assessment, and Program Evaluation – Building An Effective,

Accountable System in Programs For Children Birth Through Age Eight,” located in the

Appendix section of this document.


Meisels, S. J., & Atkins-Burnett, S. (2000). The elements of early childhood assessment. In

Handbook of early childhood intervention. 2nd

. Ed., Eds. J. P. Shonkoff & S. J. Meisels,

387-415. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Where we STAND naeyc and naecs/sde, on curriculum, assessment and program evaluation.

National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) and the National

Association of Early Childhood Specialists in State Departments of Education

(NAECS/SDE)(2009).

National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) and the National

Association of Early Childhood Specialists in State Departments of Education


(NAECS/SDE)(2003). Early childhood curriculum, assessment, and program evaluation:

Building an effective, accountable system in programs for children birth through age 8.

Washington, DC: NAEYC.

National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) (2002). Position statement on early

childhood assessment. Betheseda. MD: Author. Online:

www/nasponline.org/Information/pospaper.eca.html.

National Research Council & Institute of Medicine. (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The

science of early childhood development. Committee on Integrating the Science of Early

Childhood Development. Eds. J. Shonkoff and D. Phillips, Board of Children, Youth, and

Families, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington,

DC: National Academy Press.

Sandall, S. McLean, M., & Smith, B. (2000). DEC recommended practices in early

intervention/early childhood special education. Longmont, CO: Sopris

West.

Shepard, L. Kagan, S., & Wurtz, E. (1998). Principles and Recommendations for

Early Childhood Assessments. Washington, D.C.: National Educational

Goals Panel.

June 2013 Screening 1

Using Screening in Early Childhood Programs

Screening is defined as “the use of a brief procedure or instrument designed to identify, from

within a large population of children, those who may need further assessment to verify

developmental and/or health risks” (Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), 2004).

This section provides information on screening instruments that provide general information

about the current status of young children’s overall health and development. Recommended

practices for screening, as well as a list of recommended screening tools are provided.

Purpose

An effective, efficient, and appropriate screening process is an important component of all

early childhood continuous assessment systems. Luehr and Hoxie (1995) suggest that the goal of

early childhood screening is to identify normal aspects of a child’s health and development,

while sorting out potential problems that need further assessment and follow-up. Screening of

young children is only one part of a larger early childhood continuous assessment system that

your program has in place or will develop.

Early childhood screenings are brief, cost effective, and provide a snapshot of each child.

Appropriate screenings will identify children’s developmental levels at a point in time. This

brief assessment procedure is designed to identify children who should receive more extensive

assessment or diagnosis (Meisels & Provence, 1989; Meisels & Provence, 1989; Blackorby,

Schiller, Malik, Hebber, Huang, Javitz, et al., 2010). Therefore, once potential concerns are

identified, programs need to be prepared to act on those concerns. “Screening is always linked to

follow up” (NAEYC & NAECDS/SDE, 2003) for those children who are identified as needing

further assessment.

There are several ways in which early childhood screening may be conducted. One way is a

community screening. This type of screening is broad-based, widely publicized, and is conducted

at one point in time (e.g., annually). It generally involves collaboration among several

community agencies (e.g., local health department, Head Start, preschool, First Steps, etc.) and is

designed to include as many children as possible within the targeted age group. The general

purpose of this type of screening is to identify children who may not be meeting developmental

milestones and who would benefit from further assessment and possible services from a

community program. These efforts may also be described as child find efforts which are targeted


efforts to identify children for inclusion in specific programs such as Head Start or early

intervention (First Steps).

Another way in which screening is conducted is within a particular program or classroom.

This type of screening targets children already being served by an early childhood program and

is designed both to determine the general developmental status of the children and to identify any

children who may need to be referred for further assessment. When screening is conducted

within a program, the administrators must decide if it will be a one-time event (e.g., conducted

once a year) or if screening will occur periodically. For example, a director may decide that

children who are at-risk or who have demonstrated borderline results on screening may need to

be re-screened in three (3) months. The latter permits tracking of the progress of each child and

gives a more complete picture of the child’s developmental status over time. However, it cannot

be overstated that screening tools provide only a broad measure of developmental status.

For both community screening and screening conducted within a program, the option exists

to track a child (i.e., to carefully observe the developmental progress of a child for a period of

time and then re-screen) instead of or prior to the referral of a child for further assessment. This

strategy is useful for children whose scores on the screening instrument are borderline or who

may be experiencing extenuating circumstances that currently affect their developmental status

and progress, but which may be short in duration. Administrators, therefore, need to set

guidelines in advance for the criteria that will be used to determine which children will be

referred for further assessment and which ones will be tracked, as well as the timeline and

procedures for re-screening.

Use of a centralized screening through a 211 telephone system is a method for county or

regional district wide screening that is growing in Kentucky. In this method of screening,

parents call the number for their community (usually a 211 number) and complete a screening

protocol. A trained individual informs the parent about services and agencies that may assist in

addressing the concerns of the parent. With parent permission, the child may be referred directly

to programs such as First Steps or Head Start.

For the purposes of this Guide, screening tools included in this section are those that meet the

criteria below. These criteria will be helpful to you in selecting a screening tool that best meets


the goals and objectives of your particular program.

The publisher provides adequate information about technical adequacy (this is the term we defined earlier) of the screening instrument.

The screening tool has a positive track record and should not over or under identify children.

There are opportunities for families to be included in the screening process.

The screening tool requires a brief amount of time to administer.

The screening tool is easy to score.

The screening instrument assesses all domains.

The screening process and tool is appropriate for all ages within the early childhood years.

The screening process and tool is appropriate for diverse learners.

The cost of the screening instrument, both for purchase and for on-going use, is not prohibitive to programs.

The screening instrument is appropriate for use by professionals, paraprofessionals and volunteers with basic training.

Training and training materials for the screening is readily available. In addition to these criteria, strong consideration was given to screening instruments currently used by

Kentucky programs.

Please note that since the purpose of this Early Childhood Assessment Guide is to

recommend component parts of a comprehensive, continuous assessment system for early

childhood programs that addresses multiple developmental domains; single domain screening

instruments have not been included in this section. However, single domain screening

instruments may be used appropriately by programs for specific purposes (e.g., DECA-

Deveraux Early Childhood Assessment)

Recommended Screening Practices

Screening is an important part of any early care and education program. The early

identification of a child who may need additional support or assistance is helpful to all those who

will be working with the child, including the family. The first step in planning for a screening

event is determining what children are to be screened and the developmental areas to be

screened. Then a screening instrument can be selected which matches the characteristics of the

children and the targeted areas of development. A number of recommended practices have been

identified through the professional literature and publications of early childhood professional

organizations for selecting and using screening instruments (McLean, Wolery, & Bailey, 2004;

Division for Early Childhood Recommended Practices, 2001). These include the following.


Screening instruments are norm referenced and standardized in administration.

Data is available to indicate that the instrument is both reliable and valid.

Families have opportunities to provide input during the screening process.

The information about the child is gathered from a variety of sources (families, early childhood educators, First Steps providers) and methods (direct testing, interview,

observation, etc.).

Screening instruments are both culturally and linguistically sensitive.

The screening may be administered by trained paraprofessionals and volunteers, unless the publisher specifies otherwise.

Once you have chosen an appropriate screening instrument, the following steps need to

be considered in planning for the screening event (Nuttall, Romero, & Kalesnik, 1992)

Identify the specific ages of the children to be included

Determine where and when screening will occur

Decide the time of day screening occurs

Determine the length of the screening event

Identify the instruments and other sources of information

Determine the match of administration procedures to child/community/background characteristics

Identify the roles of professionals, paraprofessionals, families, and volunteers

Communicate results

Determine procedures to ensure confidentiality

Obtain parent permission to screen, when applicable

After you have completed the screening process with the children in your program, some

children may be referred for further diagnostic assessment; and all children will participate in

your instructional assessment. Results of the screening are communicated to

appropriate staff and administrators, as well as family members.

The purpose of screening instruments is clear as indicated above. However, there are uses of

screening instruments that are not appropriate. Some of these are included below.

1) It is not appropriate to use screening instruments with children who have diagnosed

disabilities or an established risk condition who are already receiving special services.

Children in these categories will have an Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP) or an

Individualized Education Plan (IEP). Early childhood program staff will want to learn

about and participate in the development and revision of these plans, and include the

outcomes, goals, and/or objectives included in these plans in the early childhood

programming/instruction.

2) Results from screening instruments should not be used for instructional planning.

Screening instruments determine which children need to be referred for further diagnostic

assessments. To find out about appropriate assessment strategies for instructional


planning refer to the Instructional section of this Early Childhood Assessment Guide.

3) The results obtained from screening instruments should not be used as an indicator of

program effectiveness. The purpose of a screening instrument is to identify children who

may need additional assessments to identify special needs.

4) And finally, screening instruments cannot be used as a tool to diagnose a disability.

Diagnostic instruments administered by appropriate professionals are part of the

assessment and the only way to determine a diagnosis and eligibility for services.

State and Federal Requirements

A number of early care and education programs are required through regulation to provide

some level of screening for the children they serve. These programs include Head Start, state

funded preschool, kindergarten and First Steps. Currently there are no requirements for child

care programs to assess and evaluate children. However, minimum scores on an environment

assessment are required by 922 KAR 2:210 and 922 KAR 2:170 to participate in the STARS

program.

First Steps, Early Intervention

Regulations governing screening for infants and toddlers suspected of having a disability are

found in 902 KAR 30:110, which requires that the First Steps program participate in child find

services in collaboration with primary referral sources. Primary referral sources identified in law

are those agencies that have major efforts to locate and identify children and that have frequent

contact with families. Primary referral sources include but are not limited to:

1) Local school districts special education (Part B of IDEA) programs 2) Local health departments and managed care agencies, including Early and Periodic

Screenings, Diagnosis, and Treatment (EPSDT) programs;

3) Early Head Start and Head Start; 4) Homeless shelters; 5) Supplemental Security Income (SSI) programs; 6) Local Department for Community Based Services (DCBS) office for cases with a

sustained or negligent complaint; and

7) Programs authorized through the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act.

8) Child care programs; 9) Programs providing services under the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act; 10) Commission for Children with Special Health Care Needs, including the Early Hearing

Detection and Intervention program (EHDI),


11) The Kentucky Children’s Health Insurance Program (K-CHIP); and 12) Hospitals and physicians,

All professionals and others who suspect a child may have delays are required to refer the

child to the early intervention system Point of Entry (POE) staff within seven days (34 CFR

303.303 (a) (2) (i)).). POE staff are required to obtain developmental screening results for the

child. If a child has not been screened by a primary referral source, the POE staff will screen the

child with parent consent.

First Steps uses the Ages and Stages Questionnaire, Third Edition (ASQ-3) Ages and Stages

Questionnaire - Social Emotional, (ASQ:SE), (Brookes Publishing Company) to screen children

who are referred due to a suspicion of developmental delay. Specialized screening is conducted

with children who demonstrate warning signs of autism spectrum disorders. The screening tools

used to identify risk for autism spectrum disorders are the Modified Checklist for Autism in

Toddlers (M-CHAT™; Kleinman, Robins, Ventola, Pandey, Boorstein, Esser, Barton, Fein, et

al., 2008) and the Screening Tool for Autism in Toddlers and Young Children (STAT™),

developed by Vanderbilt Kennedy Center.

Head Start

Regulations governing evaluation and assessment for Head Start programs are the Code of

Federal Regulations, Title 45, Volume 4, 45CFR1304.20. Screening in Head Start is to take

place for each child within 45 days of enrollment and will include hearing, vision, behavior,

and developmental screens. The Head Start regulations and Performance Standards can be

found at the Head Start Bureau Website: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/hsb/performance/.

State-Funded Preschool

Regulations governing evaluation and assessment for state-funded preschool children are 704

KAR 3:410. Screening is defined as a systematic process for determining which children from

the general population may need further evaluation in a particular area. Screening must be

completed within 30 days of enrollment. Screening includes the following areas:

Developmental Screening Health Screening

Gross/Fine motor Growth

Cognitive Vision/Hearing

Communication Immunization Status

Self Help General Health Status

Social-Emotional

Regulations governing preschool Child Find activities are 707 KAR 1:300. Screening is a

http://www2.gsu.edu/~psydlr/Diana_L._Robins,_Ph.D._files/M-CHAT_new.pdfhttp://www2.gsu.edu/~psydlr/Diana_L._Robins,_Ph.D._files/M-CHAT_new.pdf


common Child Find activity for the purpose of determining which children have reached certain

broad benchmarks and which children have not reached the same benchmarks.

Under a Response to Intervention or RTI model, screening is a brief assessment procedure

designed to identify children who should receive more intentional or direct instruction and is

referred to as universal screening. Results of universal screening are used in the decision-making

(problem-solving) process to increase the frequency and intensity of instruction to address

learning concerns.

Universal screening is a process in which all children are assessed to determine their level of

performance and whether they are making progress at expected rates. Universal screening can be

conducted with all children in a class or school to recognize those who are at risk as learners and

who could benefit from additional instruction and supports. Universal screening is frequently

cited as an essential component of an RTI model.

Universal screening is:

used for instructional planning

administered in a quick and easy way

intended to be re-administered repeatedly

correlated with long-term educational goals

designed to provide data on level and rate of growth.

KRS 156.160 requires a vision examination by an optometrist or ophthalmologist no later

than January 1 of the first year that a child is enrolled in public school, public preschool or Head

Start program located in the public schools. The Kentucky Administration Regulations related to

evaluation and assessment can be found at: http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/kar/frntpage.htm.

Kindergarten

Regulations governing kindergarten readiness screening for kindergarten students are 704

KAR 5:070. All school districts must administer a statewide common kindergarten entry

screener (BRIGANCE, 2012) adopted by the Kentucky Department of Education. The screener

aligns with the state’s definition of school readiness and Kentucky’s Early Childhood Standards.

Schools must screen each child entering kindergarten no earlier than 15 days prior to the start of

school (calendar days) and no later than the 30th

instructional day of the academic year.

http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/kar/frntpage.htmhttp://www.lrc.state.ky.us/kar/frntpage.htm


The Kentucky Administration Regulations related to educational services can be found at:

http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/kar/frntpage.htm

Recommended Screening Instruments

The following screening instruments are recommended as you review/develop the screening

component of your early childhood continuous assessment system. The stated editions are the

recommended versions.

*Ages and Stages Questionnaire, Third Edition (ASQ-3), Brookes Publishing Company

Ages and Stages Questionnaire - Social Emotional, (ASQ:SE) Brookes Publishing

Company

*Batelle Developmental Inventory 2, Screening Test (2005) Riverside Publishing

*Brigance Early Childhood Screens III, Curriculum Associates, Inc.

*Denver II, Denver Developmental Materials, Inc.

*Developmental Observation Checklist System (DOCS), PRO-ED

*Developmental Indicators for the Assessment of Learning (DIAL) III and IV,

Pearson Learning Group

*Early Screening Inventory – Revised (ESI-R), Pearson Learning Group

*Early Screening Profile, Pearson Learning Group

Learning Accomplishment Profile (LAP - D) Screen, Kaplan Early Learning Co.

* Assesses all 5 domains: Adaptive, Cognitive, Communication, Motor, and Social / Emotional


• Child Care Aware of Kentucky and Early Childhood Regional Training Centers - In July of 2012, Kentucky’s network of Child Care Resource and Referral services

became Child Care Aware (CCA) of Kentucky. Several screening instruments are

located in the libraries of the Early Childhood Regional Training Centers (RTCs) and

CCA of Kentucky locations. These can be checked out for brief periods of time for

informational purposes or for use in screening. The RTC staff also are resources for

further information about various screening tools and, in some cases, are able to provide

training in their use.


June 2013 Diagnostic 1

Using Diagnostic Assessment in Early Childhood Programs

One of the major purposes of assessment is to identify children who may need additional

services (Kagan, Scott-Little, & Clifford, 2003). As discussed in the previous section, screening

instruments are used to identify children who may need further assessment. This section

addresses those diagnostic assessment tools that may be used when screening results indicate a

concern about a child’s health or developmental status. Diagnostic assessment tools are defined

as those that are designed to provide information about a child’s health or developmental status

(typically as compared to other children of the same age) and may be used to establish eligibility

for special services. Two specific types of assessments tools will be discussed: multi-domain and

single domain. Recommended practices for using diagnostic instruments are provided, as well as

a list of recommended diagnostic assessment tools.

Purpose

Diagnostic assessment tools refer to those instruments that have been designed to help

identify specific areas in which children are not making progress or where they are significantly

below developmental norms. Traditionally, diagnostic assessment tools are used to assist with

determination of eligibility for services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education

Improvement Act (IDEA) (e.g., early intervention or First Steps and preschool special

education services) and other programs that provide specialized services to young children (i.e.,

mental health). These types of assessment tools provide a mechanism for analyzing the nature

and degree of developmental difficulties and can then be used to provide information to guide

the initial development of an individual treatment plan, an IFSP or IEP.

The use of an assessment process which incorporates outcomes from multiple measures,

multiple settings (most importantly those with which the child is familiar and comfortable) and

multiple informants (people who know the child well such as family members and people

familiar with a child’s culture) is always recommended (Neisworth & Bagnato, 2000) and can be

used to gather data for eligibility determination. This type of assessment process is most

appropriately used by a team of professionals and family members. In fact, most of the

assessment tools included in this section will not be administered by early childhood

classroom personnel.

For the most part, these types of instruments require additional specialized training in test


administration and/or training that is specific to the domain(s) of development that are being

assessed. Therefore, administration of these assessments will most likely be conducted by a

professional from a discipline specific to the domain (e.g., licensed speech pathologist will

administer language instruments) or in the case of multi-domain assessment tools, by a

licensed psychologist who has been specifically trained in test administration. However,

these professionals should be part of a team which includes the early childhood educator and

family members. An informed team decision, based on information from multiple

observations of children in natural environments and typical routines will produce the most

accurate and valid decisions for eligibility determination.

For the purposes of this Guide, diagnostic assessment tools included in this section are those

that meet the following criteria.

The instrument has been normed for a range of ages from birth to age five.

Information available on the technical adequacy or psychometric properties is well described, and indicate that the tools are valid and reliable.

The assessment addresses multiple domains1

.

Clear information is provided on qualifications for administration and training that is available.

The cost of the instrument, both for initial use and for ongoing data collection, is not prohibitive for local programs.

The assessment yields a standard score.

The time needed to administer the assessment is not prohibitive.

The assessment is currently in use by programs across the state.

The instructional manuals for many of the assessments that were reviewed by the Work

Group indicated that the assessment tools have multiple purposes. For instance, an assessment

tool may be used for general screening of a group of children in a single domain, but also may

provide standardized scores that could be used for diagnostic purposes, and finally, may include

specific strategies to address areas of concern within a program or classroom (e.g., DECA). The

Work Group decided that assessment tools which are difficult to categorize because they may

address multiple purposes may not meet the criteria for inclusion in the screening or

instructional sections (i.e., did not cover multiple domains), they would be included in

the Diagnostic Section, but within a single-domain component of the section. While these

____________________________ 1

Due to the number of instruments that met the other criteria but were specifically designed to address one

domain, a single domain category was created and included within this document


assessments are included under the category of Diagnostic, they may also be used for the other

purposes designated by the publisher (i.e., screening or instructional programming).

Recommended Diagnostic Practices

Assessment is an essential part of any early childhood program. When conducting

assessments, you must use assessment tools that are individually, culturally, and linguistically

appropriate and that measure children’s strengths, developmental status, progress, and needs.

Having this type of information is essential if your program is to be successful in promoting

children’s development and learning (Espinosa, 2005; Jones, 2003; McAfee & Leong, 2002;

Meisels & Atkins-Burnett, 2000; Stiggins, 2001, 2002, 2005). Standardized and norm-

referenced assessments for young children are appropriate only in situations for which they are

potentially beneficial to the child and family (NAEYC & NAECDS/SDE, 2003). An example

would be the identification of a disability.

There are legitimate concerns and issues that must be addressed if you choose to use results

from standardized, norm referenced assessment formats as part of your assessment systems

(Sandall, McLean, & Smith, 2000), particularly if you want to use these types of assessments

with very young children. While the validity and reliability of these tests appear to improve as

children get older, there are still significant concerns with their use for children from birth

through age nine, more than ever when they are used as a sole source of information and in

situations where additional information provided by more authentic instruments and procedures

are not included (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997; Shepard, Kagan, & Wurtz, 1998). In fact, federal

language prohibits the use of these assessments as the single instrument in the determination of

eligibility for special education services (see nondiscriminatory mandates in IDEA).

When assessing young children it is important to remember that the behavior of young

children is strongly influenced by biology – when they last ate, had a nap and so forth. In

addition, young children often are just learning to communicate. Their limited communication

skills may interfere with their ability to respond to or understand verbal directions or instruction.

Young children are easily distracted and often possess short attention spans. Sometimes young

children are fearful of adults they don’t know well and have difficulty separating from family

members or familiar adults. Finally, young children are just beginning to understand social


relationships and may demonstrate a lack of compliance to directions from an adult. Therefore,

the outcomes from standardized or norm referenced assessments only, must be considered with

great caution.

Given these issues, it is critical that all assessment activities be guided by ethical principles

(NAEYC, 1998) and professional standards of quality (American Education Research

Association (AERA), American Psychological Association (APA), & National Council on

Measurement in Education (NCME), 1999). This is especially true when the assessment

information will be used to include or exclude children from specialized services or supports.

Therefore, you and your staff will want to consider the following recommendations from the

NAEYC Position Statement on Curriculum, Assessment and Program Evaluation (2003) and the

Division for Early Childhood Recommended Practices in Assessment (2000) when using

diagnostic instruments.

You and your staff should use only those assessment tools for which you are properly trained. Different diagnostic instruments require different levels of training and

education. Many of these assessment tools require very specialized training and

certification.

Assessments should be used only for the purposes for which they were developed and with populations for which they were designed and validated.

Parents and family members should be active participants and partners in the assessment process. Information is best gathered from those who have the most direct contact with

the child.

Assessment instruments should be compatible with the both the behaviors and interests of the child. Assessments that are conducted in environments that represent the child’s

natural context provide the most accurate and reliable results.

Information gathered through standardized, norm-referenced assessment should be supported with information from other sources and should never be used in isolation.

Accurate evaluation and diagnostic assessment is critical to good interventions and instructional

programming. While these terms are often used interchangeably, they serve two different

purposes. Evaluation may be defined as the procedures used to determine a child’s initial and

continued eligibility for services; assessment is the ongoing process used by qualified personnel

throughout the period of a child’s eligibility to identify the family’s resources, priorities, and

concerns as well as the child’s unique needs (McLean & McCormick, 1993).


Federal and State Requirements

A number of early care and education programs operating within the state have specific

regulations related to diagnostic evaluation and assessment. These programs include the First

Steps program, Head Start, and state-funded preschool programs. Diagnostic evaluation and

assessment is not currently required of child care providers.

First Steps - Early Intervention

The statutory authority for evaluation and assessment for infants and toddlers suspected of

having a disability is, KRS 200.660(7), 200.650-676, 34 C.F.R. 303.321, 20 U.S.C. 1435 (a) (3),,

1435 (a) (5), 1436 (a)(1)-(2). A child referred to the First Steps Program must be evaluated to

determine initial eligibility and eligibility is re-determined annually. The initial eligibility,

child and family assessments, and, if child is eligible, a meeting to develop the Individualized

Family Service Plan (IFSP)must be completed no later than 45 days from the date of referral.

Families must be included in all phases of the process. The Kentucky Administration

Regulations (902 KAR 30.110 through 30.130) related to educational services can be found at:


Head Start

Regulations governing evaluation and assessment for Head Start programs are the Code of

Federal Regulations, Title 45, Volume 4, 45CFR1304.20. For infants and toddlers who are

suspected of having a disability, Head Start staff are expected to coordinate needed evaluations

with the early intervention programs within the community. They must also support parent

participation in the evaluation and IFSP development process for infants and toddlers enrolled in

their program. In addition, staff must use a variety of strategies to promote and support children's

learning and developmental progress based on the observations and ongoing assessment of each

child (see 45 CFR 1304.20(b), 1304.20(d), and 1304.20(e)). The Head Start regulations and

Performance Standards can be found at the Head Start Bureau Website:

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/hsb/performance/

State-Funded Preschool

Regulations governing evaluation and assessment for state-funded preschool children who



are suspected of having a disability are 707 KAR 1:300: Child find, evaluation, and reevaluation.

The Local Education Agency (LEA) shall ensure that a full and individual evaluation is

conducted for each child considered for specially designed instruction and related services prior

to the provision of services. The results of the evaluation shall be used by the Admissions and

Release Committee (ARC) in meeting the requirements for developing an IEP as provided in 707

KAR 1:320. The Kentucky Administration Regulations (KAR) related to educational services

can be found at: http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/kar/frntpage.htm .



Recommended Assessments

Based on review of assessment tools available using criteria presented above, the following

instruments have been recommended as appropriate for use within the state of Kentucky. These

instruments are categorized in one of two ways. Single-domain instruments are those that assess

one specific area of development or one domain. Multi-domain instruments are those that can be

used to assess children’s development across domains or developmental areas. Stated editions

below are recommended.

Multi Domain

Diagnostic

*Battelle Developmental Inventory 2 (BDII), Riverside Publishing, Inc.

*Bayley Scales of Infant Development (BSID – III), The Psychological Corp.

*Developmental Assessment of Young Children (DAYC and DAYC2), PRO-

ED

Learning Accomplishment Profile – Diagnostic (LAP – D), Kaplan Early Learning Co.

*Merrill Palmer Revised Scales of Development (2004), Stoelting, Co.

Mullen Scale of Early Learning, Pearson Learning Group

Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory (PEDI), Center for Rehabilitation Effectiveness

Scales of Independent Behavior – Revised (SIB – R), Riverside Publishing

Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales II (2005), Pearson Learning Group

* Assesses all 5 domains: Adaptive, Cognitive, Communication, Motor, and Social / Emotional

Single Domain

Motor

Peabody Developmental Motor Scales – Second Edition (PDMS-2), PRO – ED

Language

Bankson-Bernthal Test of Phonology, PRO – ED

Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals (CELF) Preschool 2, The Psychological Corp.

Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing, Pearson Learning Group

Goldman – Fristoe Test of Articulation 2, Pearson Learning Group

Expressive Vocabulary Test, Pearson Learning Group

Kaufman Survey of Early Academic and Language Skills (K SEALS), Pearson Learning Group

Oral Written Language Scale (OWLS), Pearson Learning Group


Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test III (PPVT-III), Pearson Learning Group

Preschool Language Scale IV and V (PLS-IV), The Psychological Corp.

Rossetti Infant-Toddler Language Scale III, Linguisystems

Social

Social Competence and Behavior Evaluation – Preschool Edition, Western Psychological Services

Vineland Social Emotional (SEEC), Pearson Learning Group

Cognitive/IQ

Differential Ability Scales (DAS and DAS II), The Psychological Corp.

Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children – Second Edition (KABC-II), Pearson Assessment (Non-verbal Scale included)

Stanford Binet Intelligence Scale – Fifth Edition, Riverside Publishing Co.

Stanford Binet Intelligence Scale for Early Childhood (Early SB5), Riverside Publishing Co. (This test is essentially a subset of the full Stanford Binet Intelligence Scale – Fifth

Edition; included in this less expensive version are only those items necessary for this

restricted age range. Items included on Early SB5 are identical to those on full SB5.)

Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI) – III, The Psychological Corp.

Behavior

Adaptive Behavior Assessment Scale, Second Edition (ABAS-Second Edition), Harcourt Assessment

Behavior Assessment System for Children (BASC) – Preschool, Pearson Learning Group

Child Behavior Checklist, Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA)

Connors Rating Scale – Revised, Multi-Health Systems Inc., MHS

Devereaux Early Childhood Assessment (DECA), Kaplan Early Learning Co.; The DECA is a behavioral rating scale that includes a total of 37 items--- 27 of which assess a child's

protective factors related to resilience (initiative, self-control and attachment) and 10 of

which screen for behavioral concerns. Devereux describes the tool as an assessment of

protective factors and a screener for behavioral concerns. Therefore, the tool is appropriate

for use as a screening instrument, but in addition, provides valuable information about a

child's protective factors. The DECA not only screens for behavior problems, but in addition,

collects information about a child's resilience and it is this unique aspect of assessing

protective factors that makes the DECA such a strong choice for programs to use as their

social/emotional screener. Unlike most multi-domain screeners which can be administered

by professionals in mass screenings, the DECA requires that the rater (of the child’s

behavior) know the child for at least four weeks. The DECA does allow for parents to rate

their child’s behavior and this method could be used in mass screening situations.

Devereux's philosophy, which is supported by resilience research, is that intervention should

not be put off until a child is displaying behavioral problems, but rather, should begin if a

child is showing a lack of protective factors. Resilience research points out the importance of

promoting children's protective factors as a means of preventing the development of

emotional/behavioral problems. Thus information gathered from the DECA during screening


can be used for program planning to increase children’s protective factors.

Devereaux Early Childhood Assessment Clinical Version (DECA)(C), Kaplan Early Learning Co.

Social Skills Rating System (SSRS), Pearson Learning Group

Temperament and Atypical Behavior Scale (TABS), Brookes Publishing Co.

Reading/Literacy

Test of Early Reading Ability (TERA) III, PRO-ED

Math

Test of Early Math Ability (TEMA) III, PRO-ED

June 2013 Instructional 1

Using Instructional Assessments in Early Childhood Programs

The most complex part of an assessment system, but one that will yield the most

meaningful results, is the assessment process that 1) happens on a daily basis, 2) is embedded in

the regular curriculum and schedule, and 3) results in instructional changes that improve child

outcomes, to help children meet the benchmarks outlined in Kentucky’s Early Childhood

Standards. This section provides specific information on the use of instructional assessments as

a means of improving practices, instruction and outcomes for children.

Instructional assessment is defined as “an ongoing process of observing a child's current

competencies (including knowledge, skills, dispositions and attitudes) and using the

information to help the child develop further in the context of family and caregiving and

learning environments” (Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), 2004). This section

provides information on the purpose of instructional assessment, discusses the process and

methods for developing a continuous assessment process, and give specific information on

recommended practices related to collecting and reporting assessment information.

Recommended tools for instructional assessment are presented.

Purpose

In this section, we discuss the purposes of instructional assessments. These purposes

include 1) to identify the individualized needs of children to inform curriculum planning, 2)

to develop individualized plans (e.g., IFSPs, IEPs) and 3) to inform families and other team

members (such as teaching assistants) of child developmental status. Instructional

assessments are a critical part of the continuous assessment system.

“Assessment is a way of ensuring that children are making progress,” (Dodge, Herriman,

Charles, & Maiorca, 2004, p. 22). Children’s development and learning are continuous and

gradual; a continuous assessment system enables professionals to daily identify what knowledge

individual children have acquired and in what areas they need additional support. This

information can then be strategically used to plan and revise day-to-day curriculum and to chart

longer-range plans. Accurate assessment information will also help early childhood educators to

contribute to the design and implementation of individualized instruction and effective IFSPs and

IEPs.


Recommended Practices in Instructional Assessment

Children’s learning is complex. Therefore, early childhood educators cannot assess or

document each time a child exhibits a new behavior, skill or acquired knowledge. Early

childhood programs must instead focus, select, and sample behaviors which are congruent with

program and family goals (Stiggins & Conklin, 1992). A program’s goals and objectives will

also provide guidance as early childhood educators develop a continuous assessment system. An

assessment system must align with program outcomes, standards, aims, goals, and/or objectives

and classroom or individual instruction.

There are several critical steps in designing this component of a continuous assessment

system. First, programs must plan to gather information for all the major developmental

domains or dimensions of development. The National Education Goals Panel (Kagan, Moore, &

Bredekamp, 1995) identified five critical dimensions:

Physical well-being and motor development

Social and emotional development

Approaches toward learning

Language development

Cognitive and general knowledge

Your program may call the learning domains by different names, but all need to be included

in your continuous assessment system. Even if your early childhood program emphasizes one or

two developmental areas more than others, research demonstrates that the domains interact to

affect learning. A child’s poor motor development will not only be evident on the playground,

but in the classroom or at home as well. “Assessment should be holistic, including multiple

domains of a child’s development, taking individual and cultural differences into account”

(School Readiness in North Carolina, 2000).

Second, tools for assessing young children’s progress must be: clearly connected to

important learning represented in the Kentucky Early Childhood Standards; technically,

developmentally and culturally valid; and yield comprehensive, useful information (Harrington,

2000). Third, instructional assessment should provide outcomes that also match family goals and

cultural preferences. The objectives generated from these assessments must be valued by family

members, their community, and culture.

Finally, screening and diagnostic assessment tools will not provide information sufficient for


the purposes of instructional program planning. The outcomes or information necessary to make

good decisions about screening, eligibility, and program planning are quite different.

Our goal in this section is to provide guidance to programs as they revise and/or develop an

early childhood assessment system that is aligned with the Kentucky Early Childhood Standards

and their program goals and instructional practices. There are several other important practices

that must be addressed in the assessment process. Assessments should:

address all relevant domains, measure developmentally appropriate skills, learning strategies, and learning styles, and be conducted in natural, authentic situations;

be ongoing and closely related to curriculum development and program planning, and provide [early childhood educators] with guidance for how to design child-centered

curriculum (Bredekamp & Rosegrant, 1995);

result in information that is useful in planning children’s experiences and making decisions (Bagnato, Neisworth, & Munson, 1989; Bredekamp, & Rosegrant, 1995);

result in determination of both skills and processes that young children need to learn (Bredekamp & Rosegrant, 1995);

involve multiple informan

building a strong foundation for school success: kentucky ... · foundation for school success:...

Documents